Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

keionline.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 162 posts

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#51

Post by andrewmutz »

dak1 wrote: post #4

These are rules for States. It has no bearing whatsoever on the GPL. This prevents a country from forcing somebody like Microsoft or Apple to give up their source code for "inspection" in order to access their market. It also helps to prevent States from demanding and acquiring encryption or other private keys (there's a separate section that also explicitly forbids mandating backdoors be added). Not everything in th…

Just to agree with this point and elaborate: when the text uses the word "party" it refers to a nation signing the treaty, and not people.

So when it says "No Party shall require the transfer of, or access to, source code of software owned by a person of another Party, as a condition for the import, distribution, sale or use of such software, or of products containing such software, in its territory," Party refers to a government.

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#52

Post by lumberjack »

dak1 wrote: post #4

These are rules for States. It has no bearing whatsoever on the GPL. This prevents a country from forcing somebody like Microsoft or Apple to give up their source code for "inspection" in order to access their market. It also helps to prevent States from demanding and acquiring encryption or other private keys (there's a separate section that also explicitly forbids mandating backdoors be added). Not everything in th…

Is that a good thing?

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#53

Post by forgotpwtomain »

Xixi wrote: post #25
forgotpwtomain wrote: post #3

So in short, if I understand this correctly, the US government (and any other government party to the treaty) will for example be unable to insist that Volkswagen (or any other manufacturer) open source their future emissions control software (as a condition for regulatory compliance) ?

Assuming it falls into the category of mass-market software/product, it would indeed be forbidden as a precondition to sell VW cars. But if, for instance, VW cars were measured to have too high emissions, I see nothing in this article that would prevent justice from demanding access to the source code to audit it. Alas I would absolutely prefer states to mandate this sort of source code to be open-sourced, but I thin…

The problem is the indirect costs of a product which are offset from the corporation or the consumer (e.g. onto the environment) - people buying and Volkswagon selling cars that do not meet emission standards isn't an isolated issue.

It's not so much a question of regulation as establishing a truer cost for what is produced/consumed. If the above is correct the TPP will basically mandate obscurity on (again this particular issue as an example) that indirectly impacts everyone who must continue to exist on this planet.

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#54

Post by madez »

ajuc wrote: post #39
stingraycharles wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Playing the devil's advocate here, but you shouldn't need access to a car's source code to measure its emissions. The test is broken, not the software.

You want repeatable conditions for tests so that you can compare results between models, and against the norms. When you have repeatable conditions - software in the tested product can detec that and act differently in these conditions. That's exactly what happened in VW case. It's nontrivial to fix the test so that it is still repeatable and hard to fool by company determined to fool it.

Randomized test with a suitable number of runs will cost-efficiently give useable results.

I agree, it's not trivial. But, it's not hard either.

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#55

Post by anon4 »

jessriedel wrote: post #37
stingraycharles wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Playing the devil's advocate here, but you shouldn't need access to a car's source code to measure its emissions. The test is broken, not the software.

But you can imagine an internal AI that can tell whether it's being watched by the government with arbitrarily sophisticated means. In fact, that's just an extreme example of how VW broke rules. It wasn't, as I think you might be imagining, a case where the emission measuring device was lazy and just took the car's word for it. Rather, the car's software determined that it was being tested (based, I think, on various…

Or even simpler: if $INTERNAL_CLOCK < $PROJECTED_DATE_OF_SALE { fake_emissions; }

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#56

Post by DannyBee »

dak1 wrote: post #4

These are rules for States. It has no bearing whatsoever on the GPL. This prevents a country from forcing somebody like Microsoft or Apple to give up their source code for "inspection" in order to access their market. It also helps to prevent States from demanding and acquiring encryption or other private keys (there's a separate section that also explicitly forbids mandating backdoors be added). Not everything in th…

So, as an actual lawyer i actually think i disagree with you in practice.

Imagine for a second that the US gets tough on GPL violators, and says "well, if you want to sell android devices in the US, you have to produce the GPL source code".

Or something even simpler, along the lines of "products marketed in the US must comply with all licensing obligations of software that it contains".

This one actually happens behind the scenes sometimes right now, though you don't see it.

I believe they would not be allowed to do that under this provision.

It clearly falls into:"1. No Party shall require the transfer of, or access to, source code of software owned by a person of another Party, as a condition for the import, distribution, sale or use of such software, or of products containing such software, in its territory."

3 is no exception:

"3. Nothing in this Article shall preclude: (a) the inclusion or implementation of terms and conditions related to the provision of source code in commercially negotiated contracts;"

The GPL and other open source licenses are arguably not commercially negotiated contracts.

So yeah, it doesn't stop private citizens or parties from doing whatever they want. It may stop you from being able to create laws and enforce them at import/export time around actually complying with OSS licenses.

Which is really not great, since it in practice means free reign.

You will never get state supported companies in their own countries to comply with licenses. Generally, your only course of action is to try to enforce elsewhere, or ban import/export.

Here, in the case of the US, you will not be allowed to ban import unless all of that open source software is completely US written.

(since the provision limits requiring "source code of software owned by a person of another Party". Of course, what it means by "software owned by a person of another Party" is also up in the air, since most open source software has many copyright owners , so does it mean complete ownership, partial ownership, or what?)

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#58

Post by bcg1 »

DannyBee wrote: post #56
dak1 wrote: post #4

These are rules for States. It has no bearing whatsoever on the GPL. This prevents a country from forcing somebody like Microsoft or Apple to give up their source code for "inspection" in order to access their market. It also helps to prevent States from demanding and acquiring encryption or other private keys (there's a separate section that also explicitly forbids mandating backdoors be added). Not everything in th…

So, as an actual lawyer i actually think i disagree with you in practice. Imagine for a second that the US gets tough on GPL violators, and says "well, if you want to sell android devices in the US, you have to produce the GPL source code". Or something even simpler, along the lines of "products marketed in the US must comply with all licensing obligations of software that it contains". This one actually happens behi…

Danny,

In your opinion how does this affect the ability of governments to pass laws requiring them to use only free and open source software? I think this is incredibly important not only for software freedom but for a properly functioning free society in general (think of voting, financial accounting and digital currencies, etc). Would such use be considered "critical infrastructure" or does this provision preclude passing such laws?

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#59

Post by skwirl »

dak1 wrote: post #4

These are rules for States. It has no bearing whatsoever on the GPL. This prevents a country from forcing somebody like Microsoft or Apple to give up their source code for "inspection" in order to access their market. It also helps to prevent States from demanding and acquiring encryption or other private keys (there's a separate section that also explicitly forbids mandating backdoors be added). Not everything in th…

What I've been gathering is that there is no way the text of the TPP could have been interpreted favorably because people had already made up their minds before seeing a word of it. Every single thing in it is getting the most negative, (often) far fetched interpretation imaginable to fit the predefined narrative. FUD wins the day. FUD always wins the day.

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#60

Post by vonmoltke »

DannyBee wrote: post #56
dak1 wrote: post #4

These are rules for States. It has no bearing whatsoever on the GPL. This prevents a country from forcing somebody like Microsoft or Apple to give up their source code for "inspection" in order to access their market. It also helps to prevent States from demanding and acquiring encryption or other private keys (there's a separate section that also explicitly forbids mandating backdoors be added). Not everything in th…

So, as an actual lawyer i actually think i disagree with you in practice. Imagine for a second that the US gets tough on GPL violators, and says "well, if you want to sell android devices in the US, you have to produce the GPL source code". Or something even simpler, along the lines of "products marketed in the US must comply with all licensing obligations of software that it contains". This one actually happens behi…

> So yeah, it doesn't stop private citizens or parties from doing whatever they want. It may stop you from being able to create laws and enforce them at import/export time around actually complying with OSS licenses.

The treaty specifically states a party cannot compel the owner to reveal the source code. Arguably someone violating the GPL or similar license is not the actual owner of the code.

Post reply on HN